Gideon v.

Wainwright (1963)

Gideon v. Wainwright
 What Happened?
Clarence Earl Gideon was an unlikely hero. He was a man with an
eighth-grade education who ran away from home when he was in middle
school. He spent much of his early adult life as a drifter, spending time in
and out of prisons for nonviolent crimes.

Gideon was charged with breaking and entering with the intent to
commit a misdemeanor, which is a felony under Florida law. At trial, Gideon
appeared in court without an attorney. In open court, he asked the judge to
appoint counsel for him because he could not afford an attorney. The trial
judge denied Gideons request because Florida law only permitted
appointment of counsel for poor defendants charged with capital offenses.

At trial, Gideon represented himself he made an opening statement

to the jury, cross-examined the prosecutions witnesses, presented
witnesses in his own defense, declined to testify himself, and made
arguments emphasizing his innocence. Despite his efforts, the jury found
Gideon guilty and he was sentenced to five years imprisonment.

Gideon sought relief from his conviction by filing a petition for writ of
habeas corpus in the Florida Supreme Court. In his petition, Gideon
challenged his conviction and sentence on the ground that the trial judges
refusal to appoint counsel violated Gideons constitutional rights. The
Florida Supreme Court denied Gideons petition.

Gideon next filed a handwritten petition in the Supreme Court of the

United States. The Court agreed to hear the case to resolve the question of
whether the right to counsel guaranteed under the Sixth Amendment of the
Constitution applies to defendants in state court.

Gideon believed that his 14th and 6th amendment rights were violated.
The 14th Amendment says that states must apply the law equally and
cannot discriminate against citizens or groups of citizens. The Supreme
Court ruled in favor of Gideon and said that states must provide a lawyer for
accused people who cant afford one.

Gideon v. Wainwright
 Impact on Society
Gideon v. Wainwright is considered a landmark ruling, and for good

reason. The hallmark of a civilized society, in my view, is the extent to which

we protect the interests of our most vulnerable and potentially despised

members. Gideon acknowledged that one of the nations most vulnerable

populations, indigent criminal defendants, deserves protection against the

awesome power of the state. Yet the promise of Gideon remains largely

unfulfilled. This judicial opinion on this case strengthened the rights of the

accused protected in the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments. The Gideon case

focused on the 6th Amendment right to counsel (a lawyer) in state criminal

cases.
Miranda v.
Arizona
(1966)
 Miranda v. Arizona
What Happened?
In Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Supreme Court ruled that detained
criminal suspects, prior to police questioning, must be informed of their
constitutional right to an attorney and against self-incrimination. The case
began with the 1963 arrest of Phoenix resident Ernesto Miranda, who was
charged with rape, kidnapping, and robbery. Miranda was not informed of
his rights prior to the police interrogation. During the two-hour interrogation,
Miranda allegedly confessed to committing the crimes, which the police
apparently recorded. Miranda, who had not finished ninth grade and had a
history of mental instability, had no counsel present. At trial, the
prosecution's case consisted solely of his confession. Miranda was
convicted of both rape and kidnapping and sentenced to 20 to 30 years in
prison. He appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, claiming that the police
had unconstitutionally obtained his confession. The court disagreed,
however, and upheld the conviction. Miranda appealed to the U.S. Supreme
Court, which reviewed the case in 1966.

The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice Earl Warren,
ruled that the prosecution could not introduce Miranda's confession as
evidence in a criminal trial because the police had failed to first inform
Miranda of his right to an attorney and against self-incrimination. The police
duty to give these warnings is compelled by the Constitution's Fifth
Amendment, which gives a criminal suspect the right to refuse "to be a
witness against himself," and Sixth Amendment, which guarantees criminal
defendants the right to an attorney.
 Miranda v. Arizona
Impact on Society
This judicial opinion on this case also strengthened the rights of the
accused. This case focused on the 5th Amendment rights of due process
and protection from self-incrimination. Because of this ruling, law
enforcement officers are now required to read people their Miranda Rights
when they are arrested for a crime. The Miranda Rights let suspects know
that they have the right to remain silent and have the right to an attorney.

The Miranda Rights were developed.

Tinker v. Des
Moines (1968)
 Tinker v. Des Moines
What Happened?
At a public school in Des Moines, Iowa, students organized a silent protest
against the Vietnam War. Students planned to wear black armbands to
school to protest the fighting but the principal found out and told the
students they would be suspended if they wore the armbands. Despite the
warning, students wore the armbands and were suspended. During their
suspension the students' parents sued the school for violating their
children's right to free speech. A U.S. district court sided with the school,
ruling that wearing armbands could disrupt learning. The students appealed
the ruling to a U.S. Court of Appeals but lost and took their case to the
United States Supreme Court.

In 1969 the United States Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision in favor of
the students. In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the students
had the right to wear armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War.
Justice Abe Fortas wrote for the majority. He first emphasized that students
have First Amendment rights: It can hardly be argued that either students
or teachers shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or
expression at the schoolhouse gate. While schools certainly have the right
to establish rules relating to the length of skirts or the type of clothing, to
hair style,[or] aggressive, disruptive action or even group
demonstrations, this case does not involve any of those issues. The
school officials banned and sought to punish petitioners for a silent, passive
expression of opinion, unaccompanied by any disorder or disturbance on
the part of petitioners. There is here no evidence whatever of petitioners'
interference, with the schools' work or of collision with the rights of other
students to be secure and to be let alone. Accordingly, this case does not
concern speech or action that intrudes upon the work of the schools or the
rights of other students.

Justice Hugo Black dissented. He pointed out that the case involved a small
number of students who refused to obey the instructions of school officials,
and argued that allowing this behavior would have a negative effect on
schools and on the country as a whole.

Tinker v. Des Moines

Impact on Society
In this decision, the Supreme Court established what has become known as
the Tinker standard, considered to be the high watermark of students First
Amendment rights. In its ruling, the Court wrote: "the record does not
demonstrate any facts which might reasonably lead school authorities to
forecast substantial disruption of or material interference with school
activities, and no disturbances or disorders on the school premises in fact
occurred."

Simply put, this ruling means school officials may not silence student
expression just because they dislike it. They must reasonably forecast,
based on evidence and not on an "undifferentiated fear or apprehension of
disturbance," that the student expression would lead to either (a) a
substantial disruption of the school environment, or (b) an invasion of the
rights of others.

The Tinker standard governed student expression for years until the
Supreme Court decided two other cases in the 1980s. The first of those
rulings came in 1986.

This judicial opinion in this case focused on the 1st Amendment rights of
students. Before this case, students were treated as if they lost all of their
constitutional rights when they entered the school house gate. This case
said that students do have some constitutional rights to freedom of
expression in school, including symbolic speech, as long as it does not
cause problems in the school learning environment.

United States v.
Nixon (1974)
 United States v. Nixon
What Happened?
Case Summary
In 1972, President Richard Nixon, a Republican, was running for reelection
against Senator George McGovern, a Democrat. Five months before the
election, an alert security guard found burglars in the Democratic Party
headquarters, which was located in Washington's Watergate apartment complex.
Reporters following the story connected the burglars to high-ranking officials in
the White House. Nixon denied any connection to the break-in. However, an
independent Congressional investigation revealed the existence of audiotapes of
the President discussing the break-in with its organizers.

Nixon refused to turn the tapes over to Congress, claiming the tapes were
covered by "executive privilege." He claimed that the President had the right to
privileged communication that could not be looked at by any other branch of the
government. The District Court ruled against Nixon. The President appealed and
the case quickly reached the Supreme Court.

The Court's Decision

In July 1974, the Supreme Court decided unanimously that Nixon must hand
over the tapes. The Court said that under the Constitution, the judiciary had the
final voice, not the Executive branch. As for "executive privilege," the Court
acknowledged that the President had a right to privileged communication where
certain areas of national security were concerned. However, the Court stated that
this case did not meet those conditions. Furthermore, the Court declared rule of
law because no president is above the law. Nixon handed over the tapes that
revealed that he had personally engaged in the cover-up of the burglary. Within a
few days, Congress began impeachment proceedings against the President for
his actions. Rather than face the impeachment hearings, Nixon resigned from
office.

United States v. Nixon

Impact on Society
The case United States v. Nixon was a landmark court case because it

firmly established that the president of the United States could not use

executive privilege as an absolute defense against judicial inquiry. The case

occurred during the Watergate scandal, and after several tapes were

subpoenaed, Nixon claimed the dispute lay entirely within the executive

branch. The Supreme Court disagreed, and Nixon resigned a few weeks

later.

The judicial opinion in this case discussed the idea of legal equality, which

means that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law. Even though this case

involved a U.S. President, the Supreme Court said he could be held

responsible for refusing to follow the law just like any other citizen.
Hazelwood School
District v. Kuhlmeier
(1987)
 Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier
What Happened?
Students enrolled in the Journalism II class at Hazelwood East High School
were responsible for writing and editing the school's paper The Spectrum.
Two of the articles submitted for publication in the final edition of the paper
contained stories on divorce and teenage pregnancy. The divorce article
featured a story about a girl who blamed her father's actions for her parents'
divorce. The teenage pregnancy article featured stories in which pregnant
students at Hazelwood East shared their experiences.
To ensure their privacy, the girls' names were changed in the article. The
school principal felt that the subjects of these two articles were
inappropriate. He concluded that journalistic fairness required that the father
in the divorce article be informed of the story and be given an opportunity to
comment. He also stated his concerns that simply changing the names of
the girls in the teenage pregnancy article may not be sufficient to protect
their anonymity and that this topic may not be suitable for the younger
students. As a result, he prohibited these articles from being published in
the paper.
Because there was no time to edit the paper if it were to go to press before
the end of the school year, entire pages were eliminated. The student
journalists then brought suit to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Missouri, alleging that their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech
had been violated.
The U.S. District Court concluded that they were not. The students
appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, which reversed
the ruling, stating that the students' rights had been violated. The school
appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which granted certiorari (a writ or
order by which a higher court reviews a decision of a lower court).
 Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier
Impact on Society
Not wanting to make quite such a blatant attack on students' First

Amendment rights, the Supreme Court in Hazelwood couched its judgment

in that odd distinction between a "forum for public expression" and a

"regular classroom activity." In practice, of course, most high school papers

have functioned as both; the Hazelwood decision explicitly argued that a

school publication that had established itself as a "public forum" would be

entitled to broader protections under the First Amendment. Hazelwood

East's paper just didn't happen to meet that standard. Student journalists

and their faculty advisers across the country have been wondering whether

or not their own papers qualify as "public forums"and thus whether or not

their publications have First Amendment rightsever since.

The judicial opinion in this case focused on the 1st Amendment rights of

students, specifically freedom of the press. The Supreme Court ruled that a

school could prevent the publication of articles in the school newspaper or

limit the speech of students if it disrupted the learning environment of the

school.
Bush v. Gore (2000)

Bush v. Gore
 What Happened?
The 2000 presidential election pitted U.S. Vice President Al Gore, a
Democrat, against Texas Governor George W. Bush, a Republican.
As the election results were counted, it became clear that the vote
would be very close, and that the results in the state of Florida
would decide the election. Bush was initially declared the winner by
just a few hundred votesa tiny margin in a state with millions of
voters. However, reports of widespread problems with ballots (for
instance, conflicting ballots that were designed so that people who
thought they were voting for Gore ended up casting votes for
another candidate) soon called the results into question.

Gore's supporters sued the state of Florida for a recount. Bush's

supporters sued to prevent it. To make matters more complicated,
Florida's election laws set an unchangeable deadline for
announcing the final results, so the recount had to be begun quickly
if it was to be done at all. When the Florida Supreme Court decided
in favor of Gore, and ordered the recount to be completed, Bush
appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 54 decision, stated that the

Supreme Court of Florida had violated the U.S. Constitution when it
ordered the recount only in certain districts, and that the recount
had already been tainted by shifting methods of vote-counting. Both
of these, it said, violated the equal-protection guarantees of the
Fourteenth Amendment. The court then said that there was no way
to hold an acceptable recount by the final election deadline. As a
result, it ordered the recounts abandoned, effectively naming Bush
the winner of the national election. By the time of the decision, a
month had passed since the nation had cast its ballots.

The Court's decision ended the speculation on who would be

president, but it remains a highly controversial moment in the
Court's history. Even the Justices themselves couldn't agree on
many aspects of the case. Two majority opinions and four minority
opinions were filed, each citing different reasons for its author's
decision. Some people argue that the Court had no business taking
on the case at all, and that it should have let the Florida Supreme
Court's decision stand without comment. Others have said that the
way that the judicial decisions throughout the case split along party
linesRepublicans sided with Bush, and Democrats sided with
Goreprovided evidence that the case was decided by politics, not
by law.

The details of Bush v. Gore will probably be argued over for a long
time. However, the decision was made, and history was made with
it.

Impact on Society
Election rules are made by each state, and states have many
different ways of counting votes. In this case, the Supreme Court
said that FL Supreme Court acted unconstitutionally when it
decided that only certain votes would be recounted.
District of Columbia
v. Heller (2007)

D.C. v. Heller
 What Happened?
For the first time in seventy years, the Court heard a case regarding
the central meaning of the Second Amendment and its relation to
gun control laws. After the District of Columbia passed legislation
barring the registration of handguns, requiring licenses for all
pistols, and mandating that all legal firearms must be kept unloaded
and disassembled or trigger locked, a group of private gun-owners
brought suit claiming the laws violated their Second Amendment
right to bear arms. The federal trial court in Washington D.C.
refused to grant the plaintiffs relief, holding that the Second
Amendment applies only to militias, such as the National Guard,
and not to private gun ownership.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

disagreed, voting two to one that the Second Amendment does in
fact protect private gun owners such as plaintiffs. Petitioners agree
with the trial court's decision that the Second Amendment applies
only to militias, and further argue that (a) the Second Amendment
should not apply to D.C. because it is a federal enclave rather than
a state, and (b) that the D.C. legislation merely regulates, rather
than prohibits, gun ownership. Respondents, although disagreeing
on the merits, have also urged the Court to review the case in order
to clearly define the relationship between federal gun control laws
and the Second Amendment.
 D.C. v. Heller
Impact on Society
Following the Heller decision, D.C. began changing its gun laws. An
amendment to firearms regulations relaxed several hurdles to gun
registration, and provided for the creation of a list of unsafe
handguns that could not be registered. The law kept a ban on
automatic weapons and bottom-loading guns, which has already
been challenged in court

The judicial opinion on this case focused on the meaning of the 2nd
amendment right to bear arms. The Supreme Courts interpretation
of the 2nd amendment is that individuals, not just militias, have the
right to own or carry weapons.
Marbury v. Madison
(1803)

Marbury v. Madison
What Happened?
Marbury v. Madison, arguably the most important case in Supreme Court
history, was the first U.S. Supreme Court case to apply the principle of
"judicial review" -- the power of federal courts to void acts of Congress in
conflict with the Constitution. Written in 1803 by Chief Justice John
Marshall, the decision played a key role in making the Supreme Court a
separate branch of government on par with Congress and the executive.

The facts surrounding Marbury were complicated. In the election of 1800,

the newly organized Democratic-Republican party of Thomas Jefferson
defeated the Federalist party of John Adams, creating an atmosphere of
political panic for the lame duck Federalists. In the final days of his
presidency, Adams appointed a large number of justices of peace for the
District of Columbia whose commissions were approved by the Senate,
signed by the president, and affixed with the official seal of the government.
The commissions were not delivered, however, and when President
Jefferson assumed office March 5, 1801, he ordered James Madison, his
Secretary of State, not to deliver them. William Marbury, one of the
appointees, then petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus, or
legal order, compelling Madison to show cause why he should not receive
his commission.

In resolving the case, Chief Justice Marshall answered three questions.

First, did Marbury have a right to the writ for which he petitioned? Second,
did the laws of the United States allow the courts to grant Marbury such a
writ? Third, if they did, could the Supreme Court issue such a writ? With
regard to the first question, Marshall ruled that Marbury had been properly
appointed in accordance with procedures established by law, and that he
therefore had a right to the writ. Secondly, because Marbury had a legal
right to his commission, the law must afford him a remedy. The Chief Justice
went on to say that it was the particular responsibility of the courts to protect
the rights of individuals -- even against the president of the United States. At
the time, Marshall's thinly disguised lecture to President Jefferson about the
rule of law was much more controversial than his statement about judicial
review (which doctrine was widely accepted).

It was in answering the third question -- whether a writ of mandamus issuing

from the Supreme Court was the proper remedy -- that Marshall addressed
the question of judicial review. The Chief Justice ruled that the Court could
not grant the writ because Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789, which
granted it the right to do so, was unconstitutional insofar as it extended to
cases of original jurisdiction. Original jurisdiction -- the power to bring cases
directly to the Supreme Court -- was the only jurisdictional matter dealt with
by the Constitution itself. According to Article III, it applied only to cases
"affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls" and to cases "in
which the state shall be party." By extending the Court's original jurisdiction
to include cases like Marbury's, Congress had exceeded it authority. And
when an act of Congress is in conflict with the Constitution, it is, Marshall
said, the obligation of the Court to uphold the Constitution because, by
Article VI, it is the "supreme law of the land."

As a result of Marshall's decision Marbury was denied his commission --

which presumably pleased President Jefferson. Jefferson was not pleased
with the lecture given him by the Chief Justice, however, nor with Marshall's
affirmation of the Court's power to review acts of Congress. For practical
strategic reasons, Marshall did not say that the Court was the only
interpreter of the Constitution (though he hoped it would be) and he did not
say how the Court would enforce its decisions if Congress or the Executive
opposed them. But, by his timely assertion of judicial review, the Court
began its ascent as an equal branch of government -- an equal in power to
the Congress and the president. Throughout its long history, when the Court
needed to affirm its legitimacy, it has cited Marshall's opinion in Marbury v.
Madison.

Impact on Society
The judicial opinion in this case strengthened the system of checks and
balances. The case established the power of judicial review for the U.S.
Supreme Court. Judicial review is the power of the Supreme Court to decide
whether a law or government action is unconstitutional.
Plessy v. Ferguson
(1896)
 Plessy v. Ferguson
What Happened?
Plessy (P) attempted to sit in an all-white railroad car. After
refusing to sit in the black railway carriage car, Plessy was
arrested for violating an 1890 Louisiana statute that provided for
segregated separate but equal railroad accommodations. Those
using facilities not designated for their race were criminally liable
under the statute.

At trial with Justice John H. Ferguson (D) presiding, Plessy was

found guilty on the grounds that the law was a reasonable exercise
of the states police powers based upon custom, usage, and
tradition in the state. Plessy filed a petition for writs of prohibition
and certiorari in the Supreme Court of Louisiana against Ferguson,
asserting that segregation stigmatized blacks and stamped them
with a badge of inferiority in violation of the Thirteenth and
Fourteenth amendments.

This 1896 U.S. Supreme Court case upheld the constitutionality of

segregation under the separate but equal doctrine. It stemmed
from an 1892 incident in which African-American train passenger
Homer Plessy refused to sit in a Jim Crow car, breaking a Louisiana
law. Rejecting Plessys argument that his constitutional rights were
violated, the Court ruled that a state law that implies merely a
legal distinction between whites and blacks did not conflict with
the 13th and14th Amendments. Restrictive legislation based on
race continued following the Plessy decision, its reasoning not
overturned until Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka in 1954.
Segregation is okay; separate but equal is equal.
 Plessy v. Ferguson
Impact on Society
Although not specifically written in the decision, Plessy set
the precedent that "separate" facilities for blacks and
whites were constitutional as long as they were "equal."
The "separate but equal" doctrine was quickly extended to
cover many areas of public life, such as restaurants,
theaters, restrooms, and public schools.

The Supreme Court of the United States determined that if

legislation makes distinctions based on race, but does not
deprive anyone of rights or privileges, it is constitutional.
The Court seemed to believe that the common practice of
separation was an inconvenience, not something that
abridged the rights of African Americans. The Court also
presumed that legislation was powerless to do away with
racial instincts or to abolish distinctions based on physical
differences.

The judicial opinion in this case said that the idea of

separate but equal did not violate the 14th Amendment
Equal Protection Clause, as long as the separate African-
American facilities were equal in quality to those of
whites. SEPARATE BUT EQUAL IS CONSTITUTIONAL.

Brown v. Board of
Education (1954)
 Brown v. Board of
Education
What Happened?
In Topeka, Kansas in the 1950s, schools were segregated
by race. Each day, Linda Brown and her sister had to walk
through a dangerous railroad switchyard to get to the bus
stop for the ride to their all-black elementary school. There
was a school closer to the Brown's house, but it was only
for white students. Linda Brown and her family believed
that the segregated school system violated the Fourteenth
Amendment and took their case to court. Federal district
court decided that segregation in public education was
harmful to black children, but because all-black schools
and all-white schools had similar buildings, transportation,
curricula, and teachers, the segregation was legal. The
Browns appealed their case to Supreme Court stating that
even if the facilities were similar, segregated schools could
never be equal to one another. The Court decided that
state laws requiring separate but equal schools violated
the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
 Brown v. Board of
Education
Impact on Society
The legal victory in Brown did not transform the country overnight,
and much work remains. But striking down segregation in the
nations public schools provided a major catalyst for the civil rights
movement, making possible advances in desegregating housing,
public accommodations, and institutions of higher education. The
decision gave hope to millions of Americans by permanently
discrediting the legal rationale underpinning the racial caste
system that had been endorsed or accepted by governments at all
levels since the end of the nineteenth century. And its impact has
been felt by every American.

The judicial opinion in this case strengthened the Equal Protection

Clause of the 14th Amendment. It struck down the use of the
separate but equal idea established in Plessy v. Ferguson. The
U.S. Supreme Court said that segregation (separation of people
based on race) in public schools is unconstitutional. SEPARATE BUT
EQUAL IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

In re Gault (1967)
 In re Gault
What Happened?
Gerald Francis Gault, fifteen years old, was taken into custody for
allegedly making an obscene phone call. Gault had previously
been placed on probation. The police did not leave notice with
Gault's parents, who were at work, when the youth was arrested.
After proceedings before a juvenile court judge, Gault was
committed to the State Industrial School until he reached the age
of 21.

The Supreme Court ruled in Gaults favor, saying that juveniles

had the same rights as adults accused of crimes.

Impact on Society
The judicial opinion in this case upheld the idea of legal equality.
Even though this case involved a juvenile, the U.S. Supreme Court
said that minors have the same rights as adults when accused of
crimes, and that Gaults due process rights had been violated.